I am a little confused about all this talk of different batches and versions. Are we getting the same stuff or not? I steve post amazing results with mx 292 and some get similar results but a different batch isnt as good. Why is this?
Mmmk, lemme see if i can clarify this… Steve, if i mess up, please feel free to correct me. So… these MX’s are created a batch at a time, and are made with the same ingredients as each other batch, but as a fail-safe they write which batch it was, in case something went wrong. Now Jasmin had been reading the results and they weren’t what she expected from the phero’s in the MX292, so she wanted to know which people had which batch. She was afraid that either MX291 or MX293 had been added to these bottles instead of MX292. However, reports from batch 2 show the same trend, so the mix just had an unexpected direction to it. Batches shouldn’t matter.
I’m PRETTY sure version refers to something like the Ammo Test Pack… right now Ammo is a certain version, but if one of the test pack works better, they may make THAT ammo’s version, which would then increase the number by one. That way you know it’s different from the Ammo you ordered a few months ago. With me?
Like i said, if i messed up guys, go for it.
We batch and version everything, we even include a place for the mood of the formulator, to ensure that everything meets specs and in case results are different from whats expected we can go back and review. Just because results are different does not mean that the product is different. It’s just a matter of good record keeping. Batches indicate who made it, when they made it, versions indicate whats inside.
Even if we change something like the scent it gets a new version. MX’s are not changed, unless the numerical sequence is changed. Take MX134 and MX300. The same product, but we are testing a new Neroli.
All MX292 are the same, except who made them.
Yeah but who made each batch and what kind of mood were they in? I have noticed that some of the male oriented products seem more “potent” when April makes them - esp. if she is looking forward to seeing her boyfriend, so to speak. 
Maybe that is the difference. 
Well unless you know our coding system this must be a joke. Knowing bosshank and his sick twisted mind than it is.
You never know who made what batch. Many times everybody, including Jasmin, MHarris, April and Amy will all make batches. So when they speak about the batch they made it could be any one of several they are speaking about. And, like I’ve said, unless you know our internal coding you wont know who has made which.
Please keep in mind I personally don’t know the coding system myself, nor the formulas. My results and guesses are based on my personal research.
Thanks for clearing that up guys.
Honestly, all chemical batches – right down the molecule level – are different to some extent.
There is no perfect consistency in chemistry. Much depends not only on the processes, methods, and people performing the synthesis, but also changes in starting materials. Changes in catalysts used. Etc.
You can take a chemical that analyses at 99.8% active product from one lab and compare it to another that also shows 99.8% by HPLC, and both will perform differently. The .2% impurities make a difference, and not all of the active product is necessarily “the same”, either.
I was just talking to a new friend about this. The hail from BASF in France, one of the largest chemical companies in the world. A little IH and a bottle of wine later, and they revealed a little more about the inconsistency of chemistry, even at their level, with some of the best talent in the world at their disposal. Different batches, even from the same chemists, always seem to have different performance characteristics.
The good news is that the better you are at tracking, the more minor you can make these differences.
Honestly, the differences in our batches are nothing compared to how wildly variable batches are from typical cosmetic companies. The error rates in the cosmetic industry are laughable. Our rates of difference are somewhere between one of the better nutritional companies and the pharmaceutical industry. We’re always trying to come closest to the pharmaceutical industry when it comes to consistency. We don’t always have the money for the latest and greatest equipment used by international drugs labs such as Hoffman-LaRoche or Pfeizer, but it’s still a useful target. It does help us to improve.
Anyway, to answer the question on some people’s minds, our best formulator so far is probably Amy. Or me. Or Amy. Or maybe me. 
I understand we have a new grad student from Reed coming on board soon. Interesting brains come from that school. We’ll see how they can improve our processes further.
Yeah! Like Steve Jobs!
Steve Jobs went to, and dropped out of Reed.
Back in the day, we used call it Weed College, especially since it is located in Potland. Everyone that went there was a total stoner.